Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire businessman and mayor of New York, is building the foundations for an audacious third-party presidential candidacy that would transform the 2008 race for the White House. The Daily Telegraph has established that a senior aide to Mr Bloomberg has held three lunch meetings with officials from the Independence Party, during which detailed discussions took place as to how a third-party bid could be launched. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/05/12/wbloom12.xml
Hell no! This aint happen. I take it back. If this guy can just uppity up and decide this without more work to his political career. He is not the man period. Hes' like Santa Clause in June. Independence Day in December and empty glass bottle out in the woods. He diffentley needs more work. I aint voteing for no dang mayor period. This is a classic chirs rock CB4 career move...
He is the mayor of a city that has double the population of your state. As far as I am concerned the mayorships of NYC, Chicago and LA are of equal or in some cases greater qualifiers for executive office than governorships.
That might be true however I seen these cities. Its far different than others: more trash, more money, more criminals on the streets, more police offices, more oil spills, more happy people, more problems in general. He is a mayor and I will admit. His canadacy intrigues but he has to prove. He can fix problems. I aint never once heard of anything a mayor has done to sweep the nation by storm. The best solution for me. Finish being mayor and run for governor then Presidency is all that more trustworthiness. So with that in mind clean up after your self.
Good idea on paper, bad idea in execution. Bloomberg appeals to smart folks and persons who appreciate the skills required to be an effective technocrat. If Guiliani is struggling right now with his appeals to social conservatives, then what hope does Bloomberg have? That said, he's the only Republican I could even remotely imagine supporting.
I hope he goes for it. And I hope this is the start of a serious third party. The later I don't expect, but the former I do expect.
Anyone catch the CBS Sunday morning show? Hagel all but announced that he was running with Bloomberg. This will certainly change this election. (understatement of the year) edit: didn't see the thread about it...sorry
I think the best way to get out of the two party system would be for liberals and conservatives to get together and agree to form two new parties, thus giving us four in total (left, center-left, center-right, right). That's what I'd like to see, anyway. As for Bloomberg, if Rudy is nominated then I doubt he'll run. He needs a social conservative to be nominated for the Republicans. Romney would be perfect for his run, McCain maybe. Not that he would have any chance of winning. As a Democrat, I hope he does run because it should hurt the GOP. Plus it would be interesting.
My Oh My! The quickness overwhelms. If hes going at like that; there could be some mometum there. 20% personal wealth is a heafty number and well worth every penny. I wonder. Though acceptance for americans. It could very well nip the mimimum wage thing totally if you think about it. I know for smaller states. That is a sore spot and he could very well fix it. I won't even get intitally a dime out of campaign but it is a nice to see asspirations. The ancients are wise indeed...
That's one way of looking at it...on the other hand, particularly if Hillary or Edwards is the Democratic nominee, he could siphon off votes from liberals who personally dislike the Democratic candidate. The only state I really see a 3-way race hurting the GOP in is Pennsylvania. Outside of the northeast and California, no usual GOP voters are going to pick Bloomberg over a McCain or Thompson. The guy is a Republican as much as Zell Miller is a Democrat.
I hope he does it. He's denying this morning that he has spoken to people involved with Ross Perot's run to get the ins-and-outs of ballot access. And Ed Rollins has a good point... "Money is no guarantee of success. Mike Bloomberg has done a very capable job of being mayor. Certainly he'd be a serious candidate for any office. But the challenge is winning electoral votes in enough states to win. You'd have to ask: Which Democratic states will he take away from the Democratic nominee? Which Republicans states will get taken away? That's very tough, no matter how much money he spends."
while I like this idea, I don't think this is possible. I think it would be more likely to have regoinal parties. This is due to culture. Californians are different than Texans, who don't have the Cuban population that Florida has. New York would be different than Illinois, etc. Of course, suggestion possibly will become regional.
If people want out of the two-party system, call for a new constitutional convention, because that's the only way its changing. The current constitution creates a political structure in which broad-based, coalitional parties have an overwhelming advantage. And while you're at it, can you include a provision for a vote of no confidence in the President in the new constitution.
I loathe the idea of a billionaire buying a seat at the general election table. If he wants to be Prez, he should seek the Democratic nomination.
Why, he's a Republican. The more candidates the merrier. I don't want to him to win or anything, but I'm sure he'll have some good ideas to bring to the debate.
I can't agree. I prefer substance over process in this situation and he would be the best person for the job should he enter. It's not his fault that neither party reflects his POV
Then he shouldn't have run as a Republican. What are his national positions anyway? Does anyone really know?